Friday, July 16, 2010
Tweet[IWS] DAILY POSTINGS--NO MESSAGES until 18 AUGUST 2010
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
NO MESSAGES will be sent until 18 August 2010.
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] BLS: HEALTH & RETIREMENT PLANS in PRIVATE INDUSTRY in the U.S. 2009 [16 July 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
Bulletin 2749
July 2010
National Compensation Survey: Health and Retirement Plan Provisions in Private Industry in the United States, 2009 [16 July 2010]
http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/detailedprovisions/2009/
or
http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/detailedprovisions/2009/ebbl0045.pdf
[full-text, 135 pages]
[excerpt]
This bulletin presents
estimates of the detailed provisions of employer-provided health and retirement plans in private industry in
2009. Under the NCS program, information on the incidence and provision of benefits is published in stages.
An earlier bulletin provided 2009 NCS data on civilian, State and local government, and private industry
workers, on the incidence of (access to and participation in) selected benefits and detailed provisions of paid
holidays, life insurance plans, and some other benefit plans, as well as on employer and employee shares of
contributions to medical care premiums and their average amounts. Similar data for civilian, private industry,
and State and local government workers for March 2010 will be issued later this year.
This bulletin of detailed health and retirement provisions will begin including basic health, defined benefit, and
defined contribution tables each year. In addition, each year additional tables for a specific benefit will also be
included. For example, this year additional defined contribution retirement tables in private industry are
included. Next year, additional defined benefit retirement tables in private industry will be included in the
bulletin. Periodically, state and local government benefits are scheduled to be studied.
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] CRS: WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO): ISSUES IN THE DEBATE ON CONTINUED U.S. PARTICIPATION [16 June 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Congressional Research Service (CRS)
World Trade Organization (WTO): Issues in the Debate on Continued U.S. Participation
Raymond J. Ahearn, Specialist in International Trade and Finance
Ian F. Fergusson, Specialist in International Trade and Finance
June 16, 2010
http://opencrs.com/document/R41291/2010-06-16/download/1013/
[full-text, 41 pages]
Summary
Following World War II, the United States led efforts to establish an open and nondiscriminatory
trading system with the expressed goal of raising the economic well-being of all countries and
bolstering world peace. These efforts culminated in the creation of the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1948, a provisional agreement on tariffs and trade rules that
governed world trade for 47 years. The World Trade Organization (WTO) succeeded the GATT in
1995 and today serves as a permanent body that administers the rules and agreements negotiated
and signed by 153 participating parties, as well as a forum for dispute settlement and
negotiations.
Section 125 of the Uruguay Round Agreements (P.L. 103-465), which is the law that approved
and implemented the agreements reached during the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade
negotiations, provided that the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) must submit to Congress every
five years a report that analyzes the costs and benefits of continued U.S. participation in the
WTO. The USTR submitted its report to Congress on March 1, 2010, triggering a 90 legislative
day timetable in which any Member of Congress may introduce a privileged joint resolution
withdrawing congressional approval of the WTO Agreement (to date no withdrawal resolution
has been introduced in the 111th Congress).
Most observers maintain that U.S. withdrawal from the WTO is at best highly unlikely for both
substantive and procedural reasons. Substantively, the withdrawal of U.S. participation could
undermine a multilateral system of trade rules and practices, formulated and implemented under
U.S. leadership, that on balance has contributed to increased economic prosperity and security at
home and abroad. Procedurally, a withdrawal resolution would have to pass both the House and
Senate and then surmount a likely Presidential veto via an override with a two-thirds majority
vote. Nevertheless, such a resolution provides an opportunity for Members of Congress
periodically to debate “whether the WTO is an effective organization” and ways it could better
serve U.S. interests.
The purpose of this report is to analyze some of the main issues in any debate on U.S.
participation in the WTO and to address some of the criticisms leveled at the organization.
Academic studies indicate that the United States benefits from broad reductions in trade barriers
worldwide, but some workers and industries might not share in those gains. Decisions in the
WTO are made by member governments, which determine their negotiating positions, file dispute
challenges, and implement their decisions. However, some argue that smaller countries are left
out of decision-making and that governments tend to represent the interests of large corporations
disproportionately.
The United States has been a frequent participant in WTO dispute proceedings, both as a
complainant and as a respondent. There have been complaints that countries do not adhere to
decisions and that U.S. trade remedy laws have not been judged properly. It is also argued that
this multilateral dispute settlement process is unique and that the United States has successfully
used the process to advance its economic interests.
Certain advocates for the environment, food safety, labor, development, and financial regulation
have criticized the WTO. Much of the criticism is based on interpretations of various WTO
agreements or rulings that have been controversial. An appendix sets out the legislative
procedures for the WTO withdrawal resolution. This report will be updated as events warrant.
Contents
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1
Background on the GATT/WTO System .....................................................................................2
GATT ..................................................................................................................................3
WTO ...................................................................................................................................5
Stakeholders in the WTO Debate.................................................................................................8
Economic Costs and Benefits of the WTO.................................................................................10
Decisionmaking in the WTO and National Sovereignty Issues...................................................14
Governance........................................................................................................................15
Decisionmaking ............................................................................................................15
Transparency in the WTO .............................................................................................18
Sovereignty........................................................................................................................19
The WTO Dispute Process ........................................................................................................19
Criticisms of the WTO from Environmental, Food Safety, Labor, Development, and
Financial Regulation Perspectives ..........................................................................................22
Environmental Concerns .....................................................................................................23
Health and Safety Concerns ................................................................................................24
Labor Concerns...................................................................................................................25
Development Concerns .......................................................................................................27
Financial Services Regulation Concerns ..............................................................................28
Possible Consequences of U.S. Withdrawal from the WTO .......................................................31
Tables
Table 1. Summary of GATT Negotiating Rounds.........................................................................4
Table 2. Uruguay Round Tariff Bindings .....................................................................................6
Table 3. Snapshot of Cases Involving the United States .............................................................21
Appendixes
Appendix. Legislative Procedure for U.S. Withdrawal from the WTO .......................................33
Contacts
Author Contact Information ......................................................................................................38
Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................38
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] CRS: Disability Benefits Available Under the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Veterans Disability Compensation (VDC) Programs [17 June 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Congressional Research Service (CRS)
Disability Benefits Available Under the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Veterans Disability Compensation (VDC) Programs
Umar Moulta-Ali, Presidential Management Fellow
June 17, 2010
http://opencrs.com/document/R41289/2010-06-17/download/1013/
or
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R41289_20100617.pdf
[full-text, 23 pages]
Summary
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Veterans Disability Compensation (VDC)—
administered by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) respectively—are two of the largest federal disability programs, but strongly differ along
several dimensions, including the populations served, how each program defines a “disability,” as
well as varying eligibility requirements.
First, SSDI is an insurance program that replaces a portion of earnings for an eligible worker
whose illness or injury—while not necessarily caused by a work-related incident—results in an
inability to work. SSDI is one of several federal programs funded through the Federal Insurance
Contributions Act (FICA) payroll tax and the Self-Employment Contributions Act (SECA) tax to
which all workers and employers in covered occupations (including military personnel) and selfemployed
individuals make contributions. On the other hand, VDC is not insurance, but is a
compensation program in that payments are made to veterans who develop medical conditions
that are related to their service in the military. VDC is non-contributory and neither veterans nor
active military personnel pay into the program, which is funded through a mandatory
appropriation as part of the VA annual budget.
Second, while the purpose of both SSDI and VDC is to provide income security, SSDI provides a
financial “safety-net” to eligible civilian and military workers due to their inability to work as a
result of long-term or terminal injury or illness. Conversely, VDC provides veterans with tax-free,
cash benefits specifically for service-connected illnesses or injuries. The ability to work is not
factored into VDC disability determinations, although additional compensation is available for
veterans who are unemployable as the result of a service-connected condition(s).
Third, SSDI only compensates workers that are fully disabled, whereas VDC compensates
veterans for both partial and fully disabling injuries and illnesses. The VA is further guided by a
principle that views disability compensation as an obligation, owed to veterans, for injuries
impacting employment that were incurred or aggravated by their service to the country. SSDI
benefits are granted solely on medical and economic grounds and other noneconomic factors are
not considered. Eligibility requirements generally tend to be more stringent for SSDI than VDC,
and most veterans will not likely meet the criteria for both programs.
Both SSA and the VA have faced challenges in the administration of benefits and have been
criticized for a lack of interagency coordination, processes that are “out-of-sync” with modern
conceptions of disability, and extensive processing delays for claims and appeals. These are a few
issues which led, in part, to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation and
determination of federal disability programs as “high risk.” Both agencies have made efforts to
address issues surrounding pending claims and appeals, but differ in their responses to other
recommendations.
This report provides a description and comparative analysis of the SSDI and VDC programs.
These issues will be of particular interest to Congress because of the expected increase in the
numbers of SSDI and VDC claims. The recent economic decline and aging baby-boomers have
continued to place a strain on SSA’s resources. The aging of the veteran population and expansion
of presumptive conditions policies have contributed to the increase in VDC claims.
Contents
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1
Social Security Disability Insurance ............................................................................................2
Eligibility Requirements .......................................................................................................2
SSDI Benefits .......................................................................................................................3
SSDI Determination Process .................................................................................................3
SSDI Four-Step Appeals Process ...........................................................................................5
Step 1 in the SSDI Appeals Process (Reconsideration).....................................................6
Step 2 in the SSDI Appeals Process (Administrative Hearing) .........................................6
Step 3 in the SSDI Appeals Process (Social Security Appeals Council) ............................6
Step 4 in the SSDI Appeals Process (U.S. District Court).................................................7
Veterans Disability Compensation...............................................................................................7
Background in Brief..............................................................................................................7
VDC Eligibility Requirements ..............................................................................................7
VDC Determination Process .................................................................................................7
100%/Total Disability Ratings.........................................................................................8
Presumptive Conditions ..................................................................................................9
VDC Benefits .......................................................................................................................9
VDC Appeals Process ...........................................................................................................9
Distinctions Between SSDI and VDC Programs ........................................................................ 11
Comparison of Recipient Populations.................................................................................. 11
SSDI and VDC Program Administration .............................................................................12
Health Care Benefits for SSDI and VDC Recipients ......................................................14
Thresholds for Substantial Gainful Activity Under SSDI and Substantially
Gainful Employment Under VDC ..............................................................................14
Differences in the Disability Evaluation Process............................................................15
Differences in the Treatment of Benefits........................................................................16
Continued Divergence Between SSA and VA Disability Programs .............................................17
Assessing VA Disability Compensation for Noneconomic Loss ...........................................17
Challenges Facing Federal Disability Programs in Brief ......................................................17
SSA Plan to Address Program Issues .............................................................................18
VA Response to VDC Program Criticism.......................................................................19
Figures
Figure 1. Social Security Administration’s Five-Step Sequential Evaluation Process for
Determining Disability.............................................................................................................4
Figure 2. SSDI Appeals Process ..................................................................................................5
Figure 3. Flow Chart of the Various Steps in the VA Appeal Process ..........................................10
Tables
Table 1. Comparison of SSDI and VDC Recipients, 2009..........................................................12
Table 2. Comparison of Key SSDI and VDC Program Components...........................................13
Table 3. General VDC and SSDI Eligibility Determinations for Four Hypothetical
Veterans ................................................................................................................................15
Contacts
Author Contact Information ......................................................................................................19
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] Mercer: FUTURE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT SURVEY for U.S. & EMEA (Summary) [16 July 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Mercer
Summary of Future of Talent Management Survey for U.S. [16 July 2010]
U.S. EMPLOYERS PLAN TO RESHAPE TALENT PROGRAMS AS THE ECONOMY SHIFTS TOWARD GROWTH
http://cl.exct.net/?qs=e3637ddcc50b3ee613a3be45597249cd1af9bccfe5e9c074c25857c2ee370324
[full-text, 6 pages]
Summary of Future of Talent Management Survey for EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST, & AFRICA (EMEA) [16 July 2010]
EMEA EMPLOYERS PLAN TO RESHAPE TALENT PROGRAMMES AS THE ECONOMY SHIFTS TOWARDS GROWTH
http://cl.exct.net/?qs=e3637ddcc50b3ee6f354d1b904c6c3119e21490c0056b92ebb73d9b6e54ea342
[full-text, 6 pages]
Mercer's new Future of Talent Management Survey asked more than 700 employers in the US and EMEA (Europe, the Middle East and Africa) about their top talent concerns and priorities. We found that:
        Half rate talent management as a top priority today, but 78% expect it to be a top priority within the next three to five years.
     Almost all (96%) expect an increase in competition for the key talent their organizations need to succeed - 53% expect that increase to be significant.
        Following the economic downturn, more than seven in 10 plan to change key talent programs including leadership training, workforce training, employee engagement, recruiting, retention, rewards and performance management.
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] CECC: CHINA HUMAN RIGHTS & RULE OF LAW UPDATE [9 July 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC)
China Human Rights and Rule of Law Update [9 July 2010]
All Items from the No. 6, 2010 CECC Newsletter
http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/newsletterListing.phpd?NLdate=20100709&show=ALL
or
http://www.cecc.gov/pages/general/newsletters/CECCnewsletter20100709.pdf
[full-text, 4 pages with LINKS]
CONTENTS
Announcements
- Roundtable: "Prospects for Democracy in Hong Kong: Assessing China's International Commitments"
- Roundtable: "China's Far West: Conditions in Xinjiang One Year After Demonstrations and Riots"
CECC News and Analysis
- Recent Worker Actions in China
- Central Leaders Hold Forum on Xinjiang, Stress Development and Stability as Dual Goals
- Government White Paper on Internet Claims Free Speech Protected
- Case of Wrongful Conviction in Henan Captures National Attention
- Restrictions on Religion Continue in Xinjiang
- Relatives Visit Imprisoned Buddhist Teacher Tenzin Deleg, Officials Report Ill Health
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] AfDB: Briefing Note on the African Economic Outlook 2010: Africa Rebounding [16 July 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
African Development Bank (AfDB)
Market Brief
Volume 1, Issue 2
16 July, 2010
Briefing Note on the African Economic Outlook 2010: Africa Rebounding [16 July 2010]
[full-text, 8 pages]
[excerpt}
1. Introduction
After a decline in growth in 2009, Africa’s recovery now seems well underway. The continent has exhibited substantial resilience to the global recession, relative to most other developing regions and its own past record. While some factors driving Africa’s recovery have been external, the positive outcome to date has also been due to the good policies that countries implemented before and during the crisis. Nevertheless, substantial risks remain and have been only exacerbated by the recent European turmoil, while the challenge of bringing African countries on a path of high growth and poverty reduction has become even more pressing. This note is based on the findings of the African Economic Outlook 2010 (AEO 2010). It examines how the African continent, its regions and countries, have weathered the global crisis and what the expectations are for 2010 and 2011. It also looks at trade policies and regional integration, the progress towards attaining the Millennium Development Goals and explores how public resources can be better mobilised for development through more effective, more efficient and fairer taxation. This issue is particularly important given the uncertainties about future export revenues and unstable and
unpredictable inflows of Foreign Direct Investment and Official Development Aid.
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] AOA: AGID (AGing Integrated Database)
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Administration on Aging (AOA)
AGID (AGing Integrated Database)
The AGing Integrated Database (AGID) is an on-line query system based on AoA-related data files and surveys, and includes population characteristics from the Census Bureau for comparison purposes. The system allows users to produce customized tables in a step-by-step process and output the results in print or spreadsheet form.
Databases can be found in each of the following categories:
AoA Databases
Census Databases
Multi-Database
Database Maps
What Is AGID?
AGID Overview
The AGing Integrated Database (AGID) system is an on-line query system that provides dynamic access to AoA-related program performance results, surveys and other data files. The purpose of the system is to allow users to produce customized tables in a step-by-step process and output the results in print or spreadsheet form. Whereas much of the information in AGID can be gathered from other sources, AGID users have the ability to select only those data elements applicable to their needs, and to further refine their results based on geographic locations (such as individual states or AoA regions) or demographic stratifiers that are meaningful to their application. In addition, the results from user queries can be downloaded in spreadsheet form and, in turn, post-processed for graphical displays or more in-depth analyses.
The system is based on aggregate statistics reports to speed up data access and protect individual records. Since there are many thousands of data elements available in the original databases, only the analytically relevant variables were carried over to AGID. If there is a query you would like to see that AGID does not support, please submit a request using the "Submit Feedback" link on the AGID home page and you will receive a prompt response. Although there are constructed variables and some restructuring of the database files, most of the data elements appearing in the system are in the form as reported by the states or survey participants.
The databases that are currently available in the system are listed below. Additional data sources are being considered for inclusion in the system, and all current files are updated on a periodic basis as new data become available. The “What’s New?” text on the AGID home page will provide users with information about updates to the system when they occur. Note that many of these are supplemented by survey instruments, reporting requirements documents, and codebooks that contain frequency counts and percentages of all individual data elements.
AOA Databases
•State Program Reports (SPR), 2000-2008
•National Ombudsman Reporting System (NORS), 2000-2008
•National Survey of Older Americans Act (OAA) Participants, 2003-2005, 2008
•National Survey of Area Agencies on Aging (AAA), 2005/2006
•Title VI Services by Tribal Organization 2002-2008
Census Files
•American Community Survey (ACS) Demographic Data, 2004-2008
•State-Level Population Estimates Data, 2000-2008
•County-Level Population Estimates Data, 2000-2008
•PSA-Level Population Estimates Data, 2000-2008
AND MORE....
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
[IWS] PROJECT FUTURE GROWTH of the OLDER POPULATION [updated 23 June 2010]
IWS Documented News Service
_______________________________
Institute for Workplace Studies----------------- Professor Samuel B. Bacharach
School of Industrial & Labor Relations-------- Director, Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell University
16 East 34th Street, 4th floor---------------------- Stuart Basefsky
New York, NY 10016 -------------------------------Director, IWS News Bureau
________________________________________________________________________
Administration on Aging (AOA)
Projected Future Growth of the Older Population [updated 23 June 2010]
http://www.aoa.gov/AoARoot/Aging_Statistics/future_growth/future_growth.aspx
· By Age and Gender: 1900-2050
· By Race and Hispanic Origin: 2000-2050
· All the above in one Excel Workbook
By Age: 1900 - 2050
· Older Population as a Percentage of the Total Population
By Age and Gender: 1900 - 2050
By Race and Hispanic Origin: 2000 - 2050
By State: 2005 - 2030
· Aged 60 and Above:
o Number of Persons 60 and over
o Percent of Persons 60 and over
· Aged 65 and Above:
o Number of Persons 65 and over
o Percent of Persons 65 and over
· Aged 85 and Above:
o Number of Persons 85 and over
o Percent of Persons 85 and over
· Census Bureau Informational File - suitable for further analysis
Aging into the 21st Century - A special report by noted demographer Jacob Siegel providing the 1996 projections on the future elderly population, which includes population, marital status, and household information as well as information about labor force participation, income, education, living arrangements, and life expectancy.
________________________________________________________________________
This information is provided to subscribers, friends, faculty, students and alumni of the School of Industrial & Labor Relations (ILR). It is a service of the Institute for Workplace Studies (IWS) in New York City. Stuart Basefsky is responsible for the selection of the contents which is intended to keep researchers, companies, workers, and governments aware of the latest information related to ILR disciplines as it becomes available for the purposes of research, understanding and debate. The content does not reflect the opinions or positions of Cornell University, the School of Industrial & Labor Relations, or that of Mr. Basefsky and should not be construed as such. The service is unique in that it provides the original source documentation, via links, behind the news and research of the day. Use of the information provided is unrestricted. However, it is requested that users acknowledge that the information was found via the IWS Documented News Service.
****************************************
Stuart Basefsky
Director, IWS News Bureau
Institute for Workplace Studies
Cornell/ILR School
16 E. 34th Street, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (607) 255-2703
Fax: (607) 255-9641
E-mail: smb6@cornell.edu
****************************************
